PDA

View Full Version : Wayne money



Matt700wlw
06-26-2007, 03:57 PM
Future $ owed by the Reds thru Wayne deals

Freel:
2008 3 mill/ '09 4 mill

Stanton:
2008 3 mill/ '09 2.5 mill (or $500,000 buyout)

Ross:
2008 2.52 mill/ '09 3.5 mill (or $375,000 buyout)

Castro:
2008 $975,00/ '09 1.1 mill (or $100,00 buyout)

Coffey:
2008 $925,000 (increase of $400,000 from this season)


(lance's blog)

Reds1
06-26-2007, 03:58 PM
I guess it could be worse. :)

flyer85
06-26-2007, 04:01 PM
seems like there could be a lot of buyouts in the future. :D

BRM
06-26-2007, 04:02 PM
What about Harang, Arroyo, and Hatteberg?

Sea Ray
06-26-2007, 04:02 PM
The only ones in that list that bother me are Stanton and Castro. At their age(s) there's no excuse. These contracts are better than the ones we've eaten in the past like Milton, LaRue, Casey and Graves to name a few right off the top of my head

PuffyPig
06-26-2007, 04:06 PM
The only ones in that list that bother me are Stanton and Castro. At their age(s) there's no excuse. These contracts are better than the ones we've eaten in the past like Milton, LaRue, Casey and Graves to name a few right off the top of my head

We didn't eat Casey's contract, we fed it to the Pirates.

BRM
06-26-2007, 04:07 PM
We didn't eat Casey's contract, we fed it to the Pirates.

I think the Reds sent money to the Pirates in the deal, didn't they?

Sea Ray
06-26-2007, 04:18 PM
I think the Reds sent money to the Pirates in the deal, didn't they?

We sent some money to Pitt and we had to eat Dave Williams' salary as well.

Johnny Footstool
06-26-2007, 04:21 PM
The Reds are still on the hook for Cormier's salary, aren't they?

BRM
06-26-2007, 04:23 PM
The Reds are still on the hook for Cormier's salary, aren't they?

Yes they are.

KronoRed
06-26-2007, 04:34 PM
We sent some money to Pitt and we had to eat Dave Williams' salary as well.

And then we had to eat his performances

Red Leader
06-26-2007, 04:52 PM
Freel and Coffee are the only ones out of those guys that have any business having a chance at a roster spot next year. Unfortunately, the front office handed out contracts for the others. Juan Castro has no business having a guaranteed contract for '07, let alone '09. Ross and Stanton I understand having under contract for this year, but that should be it. I doubt we'd see anything at all on the trade market for either of them. They are sunk costs and they won't go away anytime soon. You give them away if someone is interested in them at this point. I doubt you'll have any luck and these guys will be collecting checks from the Reds for years to come.

Kc61
06-26-2007, 05:04 PM
I guess it could be worse. :)


These amounts are just not that major. Freel is a contributor, even as a sub. Castro can be bought out for $100,000. Ross leads the league in throwing out runners and is a decent stopgap catcher. Stanton has disappointed but just isn't that bad and can be bought out. Coffey would get less than a million next year.

I just don't agree with all the emphasis on these contracts. If Castellini wanted to pick up major players, these deals surely wouldn't prevent it.

To me, there is a lesson however. Rather than pay a Stanton $2.5 million, find a guy in his prime years and pay him $4 million. Find a backup infielder worth $3 million rather than Castro who gets a lot less. This means increase the payroll or do a better job of allocating money.

Looking for low salaries for relief pitchers and bench players at key positions usually doesn't help much.

Red Leader
06-26-2007, 05:13 PM
The Reds made mistakes with Ross and Coffee and to a lesser extent, Freel. Those were "in house" guys that they paid based on a good performance in 1 year. They thought they were saving money (instead of wasting it) by going multiple years on those two. It backfired and blew up in their face. Roll of the dice and it turned up snake eyes. It happens.

Juan Castro, I have no idea what the hell they were thinking.

Stanton they had to offer multiple years at a high salary to lure him here. He wouldn't have signed with the Reds otherwise. That's the free agent market these days. The Reds lost there, too. Now, you can argue that the Reds should have never pursued Stanton, but that's another issue for another thread.

Sea Ray
06-26-2007, 06:27 PM
Now, you can argue that the Reds should have never pursued Stanton, but that's another issue for another thread.

Bingo...

jojo
06-26-2007, 06:42 PM
Future $ owed by the Reds thru Wayne deals

Freel:
2008 3 mill/ '09 4 mill

Stanton:
2008 3 mill/ '09 2.5 mill (or $500,000 buyout)

Ross:
2008 2.52 mill/ '09 3.5 mill (or $375,000 buyout)

Castro:
2008 $975,00/ '09 1.1 mill (or $100,00 buyout)

Coffey:
2008 $925,000 (increase of $400,000 from this season)


(lance's blog)

Where's the mention of Gonzo, Hamilton, Phillips, Hatteberg's extension, Conine, Weathers etc? It seems to me that a list like this has no meaning without a context. I'm unsure of the point???????????????????????????

pedro
06-26-2007, 06:46 PM
Where's the mention of Gonzo, Hamilton, Phillips, Hatteberg's extension, Conine, Weathers etc? It seems to me that a list like this has no meaning without a context. I'm unsure of the point???????????????????????????

I think Gonzo & Weathers are the only ones that he missed as they are both signed though 2008 (2009 for gonzo)

IIRC, Conine & Hatteberg aren't signed for next year and Phillips and Hamilton are still in their arb or pre-arb years.

jojo
06-26-2007, 06:48 PM
I think Gonzo & Weathers are the only ones that he missed as they are both signed though 2008 (2009 for gonzo)

IIRC, Conine & Hatteberg aren't signed for next year and Phillips and Hamilton are still in their arb or pre-arb years.

Hamilton and Phillips have to count because they are under control. While their exact salaries may not be known, certainly the rough parameters they'll be within are.... Hatteberg has a club option for '08. Valentin also has a club option for '08 (Krivsky extended him for '07 and '08). Same story for everyday Eddie.

pedro
06-26-2007, 06:53 PM
Hamilton and Phillips have to count because they are under control. While their exact salaries may not be known, certainly the rough parameters they'll be within are.... Hatteberg has a lub option for '08.

But the Reds could cut them if they wanted w/ no costs. I think the point that Matt was trying to make was that despite all the clamor about Wayne wasting money on long term deals for vets, it really isn't that much money. Hamilton and Phillips don't really fall into that argument b/c they are not on long term contracts and the Reds should actually want to keep them both for next couple of years.

puca
06-26-2007, 06:56 PM
But the Reds could cut them if they wanted w/ no costs. I think the point that Matt was trying to make was that despite all the clamor about Wayne wasting money on long term deals for vets, it really isn't that much money. Hamilton and Phillips don't really fall into that argument b/c they are not on long term contracts and the Reds should actually want to keep them both for next couple of years.

It is the players I object to more than the money. There was really no reason to sign some of the players on this list.

The wasted roster spots and resulting playing time hurt more than the sunk cost.

jojo
06-26-2007, 07:01 PM
But the Reds could cut them if they wanted w/ no costs. I think the point that Matt was trying to make was that despite all the clamor about Wayne wasting money on long term deals for vets, it really isn't that much money. Hamilton and Phillips don't really fall into that argument b/c they are not on long term contracts and the Reds should actually want to keep them both for next couple of years.

Even so it lacks context. I'm not sure what the point was?? Also as someoe else pointed out why aren't Harang and Arroyo's exensions included?

pedro
06-26-2007, 07:07 PM
It is the players I object to more than the money. There was really no reason to sign some of the players on this list.

The wasted roster spots and resulting playing time hurt more than the sunk cost.

I just don't think it's that big a deal. Frankly, the guys that were supposed to be ready (Salmon & Coutlangus) haven't been all that impressive so I can see why Wayne tried to squeeze another year out of Stanton. It hasn't worked, but it's hardly set the Reds back. As for Castro, yeah I'd prefer he be gone, but the Reds don't suck b/c of him either. They suck b/c the pitching has stunk, the defense isn't good, and the offense has been inconsistent. None of those problems are or were going to be fixed over night, last years mirage notwithstanding.

GAC
06-26-2007, 08:42 PM
I think we're gonna find out the biggest monetary mistake isn't listed. Those listed are minor, and some can easliy be eaten without hurting this organization.

But that 25 Mil Arroyo extension?

redsmetz
06-26-2007, 09:13 PM
With the exception of Castro, I think any of those contracts could be moved ultimately. I'm not saying the return would be great, but I think any of them can be moved to another team. I think that's what WK's been up to this season. Now will he succeed with that? Possibly not, but most of them are moveable (Freel would have to show he's better, btw).

edabbs44
06-26-2007, 10:11 PM
I think we're gonna find out the biggest monetary mistake isn't listed. Those listed are minor, and some can easliy be eaten without hurting this organization.

But that 25 Mil Arroyo extension?

Miltonesque. Especially when there was no reason to do it. He was signed through next year.

redsmetz
06-27-2007, 05:48 AM
I just don't think it's that big a deal. Frankly, the guys that were supposed to be ready (Salmon & Coutlangus) haven't been all that impressive so I can see why Wayne tried to squeeze another year out of Stanton. It hasn't worked, but it's hardly set the Reds back. As for Castro, yeah I'd prefer he be gone, but the Reds don't suck b/c of him either. They suck b/c the pitching has stunk, the defense isn't good, and the offense has been inconsistent. None of those problems are or were going to be fixed over night, last years mirage notwithstanding.

I think we leave the bad to overrule the good - in Stanton's case, certainly he was off to a bad start, and his season totals show that. But over the last month, he's pitched 8 innings with a 2.25 ERA - he's had 3 holds during that stretch. I can't find his Inherited runner stats at all, let alone for the last month, so that may pull his decent pitching in his last ten games back, but I think the Mike Stanton of the last 10 appearances (before going on the DL), is what WK was looking for.

camisadelgolf
06-27-2007, 06:43 AM
Miltonesque. Especially when there was no reason to do it. He was signed through next year.

Based on Arroyo's attitude, I think it would be safe to say that Arroyo would've walked had his contract gotten near its end. By signing the extension now, Wayne was able to prevent that from happening and prevent any in-season rumors about where Arroyo will end up. I was skeptical at the time (and still am), but I appreciate the effort to keep quality starting pitchers in Cincinnati.

bucksfan2
06-27-2007, 08:37 AM
I may be one of the few but I think out of all these contracts Stanton's may make the most sense. Stanton has had a track record as a pretty good relief pitcher. He is getting up there in age but many relief pitchers remain effective into their 40's. It made sense when you consider Weathers signed the same type of deal and has been high effective since a poor start. Here is how I rate the other signings
Freel C - Best when coming off the bench. Not getting any younger and the latest concussion scares me. Horiable base runner. Great when on, horriable when off.
Castro D - The only reason I dont give this an F is because he serves a purpose as a late inning defensive replacement. Has he been helping Edwin at 3b?
Ross B - May have had a career year last year. Everyone can't be a .300 hitter. A very good defensive catcher. I want a guy hitting 8th who can knock it out of the park with one swing.
Coffey D- - Yes I rate this worse than Castro. There was not a pressing need to extend Coffey due to his arbitration and also the fact that he has regressed as a pitcher. Has not been effective all year long. I have questions about his pitching ability and his ability to learn how to become a better pitcher.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to complain about these contracts. You dont hand out these contracts and you have about enough money to buy you a Kyle Lohse.

Guacarock
06-27-2007, 10:43 AM
It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to complain about these contracts. You dont hand out these contracts and you have about enough money to buy you a Kyle Lohse.

I don't have a problem with the dollars attached to these contracts. Cumulatively, they amount to a pittance.

But these contracts are still bothersome for two reasons:

A. Too many extended deals have been given out to marginal, non-performing players.

B. These contracts last for ridiculously long periods of time. Three years for Castro? Even at a million or less annually, that's sheer folly.

Whatever happened to the idea of only keeping solid performers, and allowing for more roster turnover among utilitymen so the bums can be weeded out, and fast-rising young talent can be given a fair shot.

Krivsky's contracts not only were strategically flawed, they practically guaranteed we would eventually see a stagnant team, tilted too heavily toward veterans harboring a false sense of security and entitlement. Frankly, I'm glad the team's collapse was so total and happened as quickly as it did.

Now, either Krivsky can clean up his own mess, or else Castellini can send both Krivsky and Narron packing. Doesn't matter to me how the mess gets straightened out, so long as it does.

jojo
06-27-2007, 11:34 AM
I don't have a problem with the dollars attached to these contracts. Cumulatively, they amount to a pittance.

Actually, if payroll stays at around $70M, just the contracts originally listed at the start of the thread add up to 17% of payroll. Thats more than a pittance to me. Everyone is familiar with Beane going after OBP when it was cheap and later defense when it was cheap in order to gain a competitive advantage. IMHO, there is a tremendous opportuity to gain a competitive advantage (or pittle one away) by the way payroll is spent on the fringes.

If you buy into that idea, then you may ot be a huge fan of Krivsky thus far.

bucksfan2
06-27-2007, 12:14 PM
Actually, if payroll stays at around $70M, just the contracts originally listed at the start of the thread add up to 17% of payroll. Thats more than a pittance to me. Everyone is familiar with Beane going after OBP when it was cheap and later defense when it was cheap in order to gain a competitive advantage. IMHO, there is a tremendous opportuity to gain a competitive advantage (or pittle one away) by the way payroll is spent on the fringes.

If you buy into that idea, then you may ot be a huge fan of Krivsky thus far.

It is the structure of baseball and each team's payroll. If you add up the combined contacts of Edwin, Phillips, Hamilton, Hopper, and Belisle they equal $1.965M. Take out Hopper and you have a lot of production coming from these players. For most teams in baseball you need to find a balance between your free agents and the players you still control for a number of years. We hear more complaints about guys being paid too much yet we never hear anybody talk about guys who the reds are paying pennies on the dollar for. All we hear about is the guys who are making to much money but in the list I have given you have 3 every day starters, one bench player, and one starting pitcher who combined are making less than 5% of the payroll.

jojo
06-27-2007, 01:01 PM
It is the structure of baseball and each team's payroll. If you add up the combined contacts of Edwin, Phillips, Hamilton, Hopper, and Belisle they equal $1.965M. Take out Hopper and you have a lot of production coming from these players. For most teams in baseball you need to find a balance between your free agents and the players you still control for a number of years. We hear more complaints about guys being paid too much yet we never hear anybody talk about guys who the reds are paying pennies on the dollar for. All we hear about is the guys who are making to much money but in the list I have given you have 3 every day starters, one bench player, and one starting pitcher who combined are making less than 5% of the payroll.

But that doesn't excuse spending 17% of payroll unwisely. Isn't that the point?

paulrichjr
06-27-2007, 01:41 PM
Based on Arroyo's attitude, I think it would be safe to say that Arroyo would've walked had his contract gotten near its end. By signing the extension now, Wayne was able to prevent that from happening and prevent any in-season rumors about where Arroyo will end up. I was skeptical at the time (and still am), but I appreciate the effort to keep quality starting pitchers in Cincinnati.

What exactly is Arroyo's attitude that you are speaking of?? I had bias toward Arroyo's attitude (not sure why except maybe because he loved playing in Boston) until I saw him at RedsFest and I'm telling you the guy was the smartest and maybe the nicest guy there. He was certainly the most fan friendly when you take into account his signing, pictures, interviews, and lastly concerts. I left there being more impressed with him than anyone and he hadn't signed an extension yet...

bucksfan2
06-27-2007, 01:50 PM
But that doesn't excuse spending 17% of payroll unwisely. Isn't that the point?

Maybe thats where we differ. I do not consider Stanton and Ross unwise signings. He has made some mistakes but the mistakes have not hurt the team like a Casey, LaRue, Milton, or Graves. You get what you pay for. This isn't the early to mid 90's anymore. You either have to draft/develop players or pay them their market value in free agency.

registerthis
06-27-2007, 02:05 PM
But that doesn't excuse spending 17% of payroll unwisely. Isn't that the point?

No team spends 100% of their payroll "wisely". And with Junior's and Milton's contracts set to come off the books next year, even assuming the reds payroll stays at its current level, there's no reason a competitive team can't be put together.

This team has its share of problems. And the money owed to the likes of Ross, Castro and Stanton simply isn't a very big contributor to that department.

VR
06-27-2007, 02:08 PM
Freel and Coffee are the only ones out of those guys that have any business having a chance at a roster spot next year. Unfortunately, the front office handed out contracts for the others. Juan Castro has no business having a guaranteed contract for '07, let alone '09. Ross and Stanton I understand having under contract for this year, but that should be it. I doubt we'd see anything at all on the trade market for either of them. They are sunk costs and they won't go away anytime soon. You give them away if someone is interested in them at this point. I doubt you'll have any luck and these guys will be collecting checks from the Reds for years to come.

David Ross is OPSing .800 the last two months. Leads the majors in CS% by 10 points. 3rd in the majors for dingers, and continues to be misused by Jerry Narron.

There are a lot of problems, David Ross is waaaaaay down the list.

jojo
06-27-2007, 02:15 PM
No team spends 100% of their payroll "wisely".

Thats my point....it's an inefficiency that's waiting to be exploited.... You can bet Beane is thinking about the margins.

camisadelgolf
06-27-2007, 03:09 PM
What exactly is Arroyo's attitude that you are speaking of?? I had bias toward Arroyo's attitude (not sure why except maybe because he loved playing in Boston) until I saw him at RedsFest and I'm telling you the guy was the smartest and maybe the nicest guy there. He was certainly the most fan friendly when you take into account his signing, pictures, interviews, and lastly concerts. I left there being more impressed with him than anyone and he hadn't signed an extension yet...

I don't mean to imply that Arroyo has a negative attitude or anything like that. It's just that he's frequently talked about his desire to play in front of a lot of people, and Cincinnati isn't able to provide him that. If he were in the last year of his contract, it's my opinion that he would ignore any offers from the Reds so he could test the market and go to a large-market team.

REDREAD
06-27-2007, 07:22 PM
I don't mean to imply that Arroyo has a negative attitude or anything like that. It's just that he's frequently talked about his desire to play in front of a lot of people, and Cincinnati isn't able to provide him that. If he were in the last year of his contract, it's my opinion that he would ignore any offers from the Reds so he could test the market and go to a large-market team.

Arroyo seemed pretty miffed that he gave Boston a nice deal and then they traded him. My guess is that when Harang was extended, if the Reds didn't give him some cash, he'd probably bail as a FA as well. While it looks like the Bronson extension is probably going to bite us in the rearend, I thought it was a decent risk at the time. Even if Bronson can get back to being a 4.3-4.5 ERA pitcher, that can eat innings, it's not a total albotross.

My biggest beefs were signing all the marginal junk. Brandon Harris was tossed away in favor of Castro. That's rediculous. If by some miracle, the Reds have a great young SS emerge on their farm, he's going to be blocked by Gonzo and Castro.

I think Castro and Stanton would be impossible to move at this point. My guess is that if they are passed through waivers after the trading deadline and no one will claim them.

Extending Coffey for another year isn't a big deal for me. No matter how bad he pitches this year, the Reds aren't going to DFA him. He's not going to be making that much next year anyhow.

Signing Stanton when the Reds were already commited to Cormier was idiotic, IMO. Especially giving him a 2-3 year deal. I would've been ok with a one year deal for Stanton, but why commit to potentially 3 years. If Stanton makes 140 appearances in 2007-8, the option automatically vests. If Stanton stays healthy, he should easily reach that incentive.

The Reds could've taken the Stanton + Castro money and signed Bradford. He got 10 million for 3 years from the O's. The Reds would've finally gotten the RH impact bullpen arm they desparately needed instead of adding more junk. Heck, if it took 15 million/3 years for Bradford, the Reds should've done it, instead of spending on dreck.

D-Man
06-27-2007, 07:53 PM
Thats my point....it's an inefficiency that's waiting to be exploited.... You can bet Beane is thinking about the margins.

Beane has shown an ability to waste his payroll $$ with the best of 'em.

Kendall: $13.7M, .513 OPS
Loiaza: $7.5M (on DL)
Kotsay: $8M, .633
Piazza: $8.5M (on DL), .718 OPS as a DH

For those keeping track at home, that's $37M for 4 (!!) win shares in a half season.

GAC
06-27-2007, 08:15 PM
Based on Arroyo's attitude, I think it would be safe to say that Arroyo would've walked had his contract gotten near its end. By signing the extension now, Wayne was able to prevent that from happening and prevent any in-season rumors about where Arroyo will end up. I was skeptical at the time (and still am), but I appreciate the effort to keep quality starting pitchers in Cincinnati.

I appreciate effort too. But effort without knowledge is pretty futile, and can lead to rash and costly mistakes. Now I am not yet to the point where I think the Arroyo signing was a mistake, or that he's Milton. And looking at the situation with quality pithcing being in short demand around MLB (and very costly), I can understand Kriv's motive. But was it unnecessary chance taking?

But so far it's not looking good. And when you're performing like he is, I could care less about one's attitude - let'em walk. But don't lock them into a long term contract you may end up regretting.

And the bottomline is that Arroyo's resume, prior to coming to the Reds, was very league average, and not that of a #1 or #2 starter.

Seems like we signed him to that extension with crossed fingers and a lot of hope.

remdog
06-28-2007, 01:24 AM
I appreciate effort too. But effort without knowledge is pretty futile, and can lead to rash and costly mistakes. Now I am not yet to the point where I think the Arroyo signing was a mistake, or that he's Milton. And looking at the situation with quality pithcing being in short demand around MLB (and very costly), I can understand Kriv's motive. But was it unnecessary chance taking?

But so far it's not looking good. And when you're performing like he is, I could care less about one's attitude - let'em walk. But don't lock them into a long term contract you may end up regretting.

And the bottomline is that Arroyo's resume, prior to coming to the Reds, was very league average, and not that of a #1 or #2 starter.

Seems like we signed him to that extension with crossed fingers and a lot of hope.

That's a pretty good sumation of the way I look at it also, G-Man.

Rem